From: VegasJerry <jerryst@cox.net>
Subject: Re: A weak 'President'
Full headers:
X-Received: by 10.200.41.198 with SMTP id 6mr18052544qtt.30.1520459825071;
Wed, 07 Mar 2018 13:57:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.31.169.211 with SMTP id s202mr2661631vke.4.1520459824884;
Wed, 07 Mar 2018 13:57:04 -0800 (PST)
Path: news.netfront.net!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!r16no597595qtn.1!news-out.google.com!a13ni288qtd.1!nntp.google.com!r16no597590qtn.1!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.gambling.poker
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2018 13:57:04 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <f_XnC.48375$ma4.15323@fx10.iad>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=68.104.8.178; posting-account=Hm3-XAoAAADEywKbjLyIgNX200WVCCV9
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.104.8.178
References: <17e861cc-43f2-43cc-9af2-a7e8a2e49633@googlegroups.com>
<cMidnVkAq43wXAfHnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <%LDmC.112133$u94.45826@fx08.iad>
<ILydnY3MIoc_kAbHnZ2dnUU7_8xj4p2d@giganews.com> <BAFmC.64372$RQ3.25830@fx02.iad>
<04qdnb4Xr8GX3wbHnZ2dnUU7_8xj4p2d@giganews.com> <3KHmC.80277$s_2.44357@fx42.iad>
<AfmdnfR5C4ircAbHnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <8UYmC.139492$NZ2.58637@fx40.iad>
<U_adnRrqNOgczQDHnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <d9c55c9c-5b9d-4bbc-ad98-8ab918bd7cd8@googlegroups.com>
<f5idnS42b-GbPwDHnZ2dnUU7_81i4p2d@giganews.com> <G1inC.36489$fQ7.36293@fx13.iad>
<uLadncOEP6vLXQDHnZ2dnUU7_8xj4p2d@giganews.com> <eQlnC.36280$VM2.21223@fx01.iad>
<RLqdndqo2alVSQLHnZ2dnUU7_81i4p2d@giganews.com> <f_XnC.48375$ma4.15323@fx10.iad>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <f71e294d-e4e4-457b-af99-66c2501219c5@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: A weak President
From: VegasJerry <jerryst@cox.net>
Injection-Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2018 21:57:05 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 98
Print Article
Forward Article
On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 12:31:10 PM UTC-8, Dutch wrote:
> On 3/7/2018 4:02 AM, da pickle wrote:
> > On 3/5/2018 7:06 PM, Dutch wrote:
> >> On 3/5/2018 2:10 PM, da pickle wrote:
> >>> On 3/5/2018 2:47 PM, Dutch wrote:
> >>>> On 3/5/2018 12:01 PM, da pickle wrote:
> >>>>> On 3/5/2018 1:13 PM, risky biz wrote:
> >>>>>> On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 6:13:30 AM UTC-8, da pickle wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 3/4/2018 2:43 PM, Dutch wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 3/4/2018 4:57 AM, da pickle wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The whole subject of the thread is an article about John Brennan
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The subject is not *about* John Brennan, that is just another
> >>>>>>>> transparent diversion. The subject is the instability of the 
> >>>>>>>> current
> >>>>>>>> POTUS, a topic raised by Nicolle Wallace in an interview with 
> >>>>>>>> John Brennan.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Is there some other opinion about the President presented in the 
> >>>>>>> article
> >>>>>>> other than the opinion of John Brennan?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The telling thing here is that you cannot factually refute a single
> >>>>>>>> point Brennan makes in the interview, so you choose to attack his
> >>>>>>>> credibility. I add numerous points which further illustrate the
> >>>>>>>> instability and unsuitability of this president and you attack my
> >>>>>>>> credibility. When are you going to wake up and realize that it 
> >>>>>>>> is the
> >>>>>>>> credibility of your president that matters? When are you going to
> >>>>>>>> finally realize that this presidency constitutes a global crisis?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Brennan states his opinion.  You apparently agree with his opinion
> >>>>>>> without more.  You have not supported your opinion with anything 
> >>>>>>> more
> >>>>>>> than your opinion and neither has he.  Everyone knows your opinion.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> You can safely bet that most Americans recognize John Brennan's 
> >>>>>> description of Donald Trump as an accurate description of the 
> >>>>>> behavior they can see themselves. Your brilliant idea that this 
> >>>>>> should be 'balanced' by the input of devotees of Donald Trump who 
> >>>>>> choose to ignore his behavior is just silly.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> You may think your opinion is the only opinion worth considering, 
> >>>>>>> but
> >>>>>>> you could be wrong.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> You are so biased that you cannot see your own bias any more.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> You are the reflection of those that hated Obama so much that 
> >>>>>>> they could
> >>>>>>> not see even one thing about his presidency that was worthwhile.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Your shouted opinion of your opinion does not raise it's validity 
> >>>>> at all.  People of faith are always quite sure of their beliefs.
> >>>>
> >>>> Your attempt to reduce the issue down to a matter of political 
> >>>> opinions is desperate and unconvincing. A list of startling words 
> >>>> and actions by this president in just the past few days has been 
> >>>> presented and you have failed to explain or rationalize a single one 
> >>>> of them. You can't, they are all inexplicable. All you're doing is 
> >>>> throwing up a smokescreen.
> >>>
> >>> Actions speak louder than words ... you have only words ... your 
> >>> faith in your words is commendable.
> >>
> >> Spare me the platitudes. Pick just one of the recent controversies 
> >> coming out of this Whitehouse and we can discuss it rationally. We 
> >> could start with the president's suggestion that due process be 
> >> suspended when it comes to firearms, or the tariffs, or the military 
> >> parade, there are plenty to pick from. Let's get real.
> > 
> > You just don't know a joke when you hear it ... sarchasm alert!
> 
> Concession accepted.

___________________

> Once again (he) fail(s) to acknowledge my correcting (him). 
> Once again (he) flail(s) and stumble(s).